Research On Qualitative Problems Of Double Fraud In Guaranteed Loans

The main content of the first chapter is to analyze the typical cases in the judicial practice and sort out the difficult problems in the practice of double fraud,including the different identification of the fraud guarantee behavior,the different identification of the nature of the guarantor’s payment behavior,the different identification of the damaged person of the double fraud behavior,the different identification of the number of crimes of double fraud behavior,the fraud behavior and the victim A summary of different problems.The main content of the second chapter is to discuss the qualitative behavior of the fraudulent behavior of the guarantor by using false materials in the case of double fraud.The first part first discusses the controversy in the theory and judicial practice of the qualitative behavior of the actor in defrauding the guarantee.The second part mainly demonstrates that the actor’s deception of guarantee for the purpose of illegal possession constitutes the crime of contract fraud.This article believes that after the guarantor assumes the guarantee responsibility,itshould be identified as the ultimate damaged person,which is the "victim" of the contract fraud crime.Therefore,the behavior of the actor to obtain the guarantee for the purpose of illegal possession should be regarded as the contract fraud crime.When the guarantor provides the guarantee but fails to perform the guarantee obligation for other reasons and has not suffered property damage,the actor only constitutes the attempt of contract fraud.When the guarantor actually bears the guaranty liability and suffers property damage,the actor constitutes an attempt to contract fraud.The third part mainly demonstrates that the actor’s failure to obtain security for the purpose of illegal possession does not constitute the crime of contract fraud.This article argues that when the actor does not defraud guarantees for the purpose of illegal possession,the creditor’s debt relationship between the actor,the bank and the guarantor is only adjusted by the civil legal relationship,and the bank can require the actor to assume the obligation to repay the debt The guarantor bears the guarantee liability,and the guarantor can recover the actor’s liability after bearing the guarantee liability.The main content of the third chapter is to discuss the qualitative behavior of the bank fraud in the double fraud case.The first part discusses the deconstruction of the objective elements of the crime of fraud.The second part mainly interprets the "deceptive means" in the crime of defrauding loans,including the content of "deceptive means",the reasons for focusing on the role of "deceptive means" in the crime of defrauding loans,and how to correctly determine the effect of "deceptive means" on conviction.The third part mainly explains the causal relationship between deception and bank losses in the crime of fraud.This article argues that although the perpetrators took deceptive measures,the bank did not fall into the wrong understanding,and the bank’s loan due to deceptive behavior did not necessarily result in losses.Accordingly,the act of obtaining a bank loan by deceptive persons should not be regarded as a crime of fraudulently obtaining a loan.